Haha, I just said I'm not even sure we disagree! The only one who seems to be freaking out is the person you're defending.

OK, I'm taking umbrage with this comment.

First of all, my story was not gripping, it was a word of caution. Frankly, I don't care if the firm "dinged" me for pants. While she may have liked me, maybe she liked other people more. I didn't hear the comment first hand so I'm not even sure what was said. As I stated earlier, if it is the firm I think it is, I could do without the callback. I have options that are better for me in that city and I also don't think I clicked with this particular person.

Second, I think I'm hardly the one that is "freaking out" on this thread. There are plenty of others that I would say are more upset (on both sides of the issue). Honestly, I think both sides have valid arguments.

Finally, the comment was actually a good thing because it confirmed my suspicion that my pants were indeed to short and needed to be fixed.

All of that being said, I feel like some of you are very quick to make judgments about my character (that I am a sloppy, socially inept, impoverished, scum bag) based on my story. While that is fine and good, just keep in mind I shared a story with the purpose of saying: "yes, some firms may notice minor details of your dress." Attacking me for my pants after sharing the story comes across (to me at least) as arrogant and superficial, especially after I admitted that it was something I should have taken care of. I would argue that indicates social ineptitude more than an improperly tailored suit.

All of that being said, I feel like some of you are very quick to make judgments about my character (that I am a sloppy, socially inept, impoverished, scum bag) based on my story. While that is fine and good, just keep in mind I shared a story with the purpose of saying: "yes, some firms may notice minor details of your dress." Attacking me for my pants after sharing the story comes across (to me at least) as arrogant and superficial, especially after I admitted that it was something I should have taken care of. I would argue that indicates social ineptitude more than an improperly tailored suit.

I'm sorry that anything dash or I have said made you think we were saying you were poor (not that it's a bad thing -- but I don't like people to make assumptions about me either). I think all of this could be a product of regional differences or youth or a certain body type or just bad luck with a bad tailor. The easiest and most expansive explanation is that you don't come from the same socioeconomic class as the people from the firm or the people to whom they are pinning their norms. (Not many people do. Bluebloods are a dying breed.) It's not about being poor. It's about not being a certain kind of rich. (Also, ftr, I assume that most people in law school have very little extra money to throw around, at least until their first summer at a firm.)

All of that being said, I feel like some of you are very quick to make judgments about my character (that I am a sloppy, socially inept, impoverished, scum bag) based on my story. While that is fine and good, just keep in mind I shared a story with the purpose of saying: "yes, some firms may notice minor details of your dress." Attacking me for my pants after sharing the story comes across (to me at least) as arrogant and superficial, especially after I admitted that it was something I should have taken care of. I would argue that indicates social ineptitude more than an improperly tailored suit.

I'm sorry that anything dash or I have said made you think we were saying you were poor (not that it's a bad thing -- but I don't like people to make assumptions about me either). I think all of this could be a product of regional differences or youth or a certain body type or just bad luck with a bad tailor. The easiest and most expansive explanation is that you don't come from the same socioeconomic class as the people from the firm or the people to whom they are pinning their norms. (Not many people do. Bluebloods are a dying breed.) It's not about being poor. It's about not being a certain kind of rich. (Also, ftr, I assume that most people in law school have very little extra money to throw around, at least until their first summer at a firm.)

Ditto. RPP, I hope you know that I was going from your specific experience to speak more generally and hypothetically. Please excuse me if I've made any assumptions about you. For the record, I too have had *&^% luck with a tailor. It's okay, though. I hit his car with my car, and now I don't go to him anymore. In related news, I wear skirt suits because I haven't found anyone new to hem my pants.

I find it slightly risible that bosco thinks I'm freaking out, for the record. The initial comment was explicitly presented as a "rant," which was then declared to be "over," after which point I defended the substance of the rant. No freaking out, I assure you. Not that I give a *&^% if people imply that I'm hysterical and overemotional. I mostly get "nasty, icy, and unpleasant" in person, so it's nice to present both glittering sides of my personality.

I don't mean to attack you for your pants. But the snap judgment by an interviewer--when they have to make a call regarding whether to spend thousands of dollars of firm resources to further pursue this kid--could be that you are socially inept, lack self awareness, lazy, unkempt, wouldn't go over well with millionaire partners and clients, etc.

Like I said earlier, I thought you had the right response. You said "Oh well" and fixed the pants.

But...didn't you also imply/say that such a snap judgment is justified, or at least not unjustified, in some essential way? I could be confusing you with someone else in the thread, though.